Shapps knocked back on plans to scrap TSA

1 July 2010 | By Isabel Hardman

The housing minister has been forced to put his plans to scrap the Tenant Services Authority on hold after he failed to obtain clearance from the Cabinet Office.

A senior Whitehall source told Inside Housing that the Treasury had insisted on a full review of social housing regulation – announced this week – despite Grant Shapps’ desire to scrap the regulator.

The source said the review would cover all options, ranging from abolishing the regulator to keeping it and continuing with the current framework.

The Treasury is said to be concerned about the effect scrapping the TSA could have on lender confidence.

A source at the TSA said staff were not pinning their hopes of a last-minute stay of execution for the regulator, but that they expected Mr Shapps would have to fight to get his way on moving regulation of governance and viability across to the Homes and Communities Agency and complaints to the Housing Ombudsman Service.

The review will be part of the Comprehensive Spending Review, which will report back in the autumn.

Mr Shapps unveiled his plans to axe the TSA during an interview with Inside Housing last month. He said he wanted to ‘delete the quango’ in the 2010 decentralisation and localism bill, and that regulation would pass to the HCA.

But at last week’s Chartered Institute of Housing conference in Harrogate, Mr Shapps said he was launching a review of social housing regulation. He claimed the TSA would still go, but shied away from confirming which bodies would take over its regulatory functions. The speed of the turn-around is exemplified by the fact the Communities and Local Government department was unable to provide any details on the terms of reference for the review at the time of going to press.

This week, senior figures in the housing world said they were wary of losing a regulatory regime that they had worked hard to achieve and were happy with. David Orr, chief executive of the National Housing Federation said: ‘Over the past few years, I believe that, through working closely with government, we have crafted an effective and modern regulatory settlement.’

Richard Capie, director of policy at the CIH, said the review ‘needs to build on the foundations that are already in place’.

Readers' comments (12)

Anonymous | 01/07/2010 10:35 am
Hmmm - fascinationg undercurrents here. Does this mean that Mr Shapps was over-ruled by civil servants in true 'yes minister' style ? Or was it politiciians i.e. Mr Osbourne & Co. ?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Chris | 01/07/2010 1:49 pm
How embarrasing for the Minister, but not surprising considering the extent of drivelling 'how I'm saving the world in a week' type stories his friends in the local press keep printing. He is looking more like an amature campaigner than a new statesman by the hour!
Perhaps from now he will restrain himself and issue only worked out policy and not personal and pointless rant.

Prediction for early cabinet reshuffle - oops, forgot housing's not important enough to be in the cabinet.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Michael Carr | 01/07/2010 2:59 pm
As Shapps is not in the cabinet it should be easy to get rid of him, the sooner the better I say as his coments on the TSA have put the whole of co-regulation on hold and all the work tenants have done for free is being lost as well as the £42m spent on TSA start up.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 01/07/2010 3:01 pm
Will Mr Cameron undermine his minister and show the coilition weakness everyones waiting for, or, will the Minister stick to his guns.
Mr Shapps seems to be a true Tory to me and deserves the support of his leader.
I think tenants will benifit whatever happens.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Junior | 01/07/2010 3:49 pm
Well, well - I glad someone's considered the outstanding complaints send to the TSA
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
gordon thompson | 01/07/2010 4:29 pm
How acutely embarrassing for Shapps. Serves him right for his totally inappropriate language recently (eg. "the TSA is toast"). This looks like a classic case of someone who has gained a lot of power very quickly and got a bit too big for his boots - and now the big boys have decided to slap him down. I am no fan of the TSA - but the TSA is an employer and I am sure the staff concerned are none to pleased at his apparent glee and killing them off and putting them on the dole. I am equally sure that the tenants who believe in the TSA approach will be equally fed up with him. I am sure he will remain in post (too embarrasing to remove him so early - but perhaps this public bloodying of his nose may settle him down a bit. I am for change - but lets do it sensibly and appropriately please.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Geoff Pearse | 02/07/2010 7:59 am
I'm not sure the criticism of Shapps is fair. A strong regulatory system is urgently needed, including licensing and it needs a fresh outlook on the issue that Shapps seems to have. As far as I can tell from what little experience I've had with the TSA, they are good on basic regulation with regard to control of eg management fee limits, but shoo away individual residents complaints or queries as not being in their remit. This is where we, as residents need to have some clout from somewhere, especially now that CARLEX is struggling to regain its momentum. I think the TSA is also on a learning curve on leasehold matters.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 02/07/2010 9:44 am
Shapps is cheap . . . the TSA is 'toast', indeed! What sort of ministerial comment is that? People know that the TSA is unfit for purpose; it's no more than the Housing Corporation's lees in a new bottle, all of its many defects, an oh-so-tacky house style and a truly appalling website. As for the pink camper van episode . . .
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 02/07/2010 11:28 am
I attended a conference in Birmingham earlier this year, Peter Marsh said how successful the pink camper van campaign was and that several major organisations are commissioning a similar campaign! Highly amusing but very worrying.

Looks like Shapps may need to borrow the pink van!!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
sihrah | 03/07/2010 0:37 am
It is about time that David Orr checks some of his statements; it was tenants who did most of the work establishing the TSA. He may have been working to undermine what the Tenants were doing with some of the more doggy Landlords but the better ones have accepted the TSA and are working with the tenants not against them on the new standards put out by the TSA.
I think Mr Grant should go before he does anymore damage to the housing sector.
It is one thing to rearrange the regulatory authority but just to scrap it with no thought (or he is not telling us) of how it can be included within another department is pure idiocy.
I agree with an earlier comment that the whole of the housing sector should be shaken up before the private sector turns into another Rackman situation like we had some years back.
Get all the rented housing landlords together and the rental agents that work for landlords under one regulator so that there are standard tenancy agreements, minimum standards of service to be provided and the ability to move from area to area without loosing tenure rights. It would not be a one size fits all as that would not work but there can be standards, codes of practise, value for money and other things that are common to all parties and these should be included, it will take time and money to do it but the TSA have started the ball rolling with the RSL Associations and the other RSL landlords, now expand that work to include the rest of the rented sector. This could also fix rent levels for the various types of property/style and the different areas so that renting in a deprived area the level would be the same across the country, it will take some working out but I am sure it is achievable if all landlords are under the same umbrella of regulation.
Come on people get real we are in a mess do not make it worse by doing ill thought out thing that would make it far worse.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment